It can be very tempting, especially early in the debate season, to keep your debate case a secret even within your own club. After all, you’ve poured your time, effort, and energy into this case and you want to protect it from the cruel eyes of the world. Or maybe, you want to keep an aura of surprise – to hear the whispers in hallways and the fear on your opponents faces as they walk into the room. However, these options are not practically or strategically going to give you the best competitive results.
Some argue that you should share your case because we’re all a team, and that’s what teams should do. While true, I’d like to present a couple more selfish reasons why you should share your case with anyone and everyone early in the season.
- Debate success is based on feedback
Why do you read your ballots after a tournament? (If you’re not….that’s definitely a good first step.) Debate is a subjective sport. In most rounds, one person picks the winner and the loser based on their perception of the round, which can mean a host of different things. Understanding how other people perceive your case, the way you present it, and the persuasiveness of your arguments allows you to finetune your arguments, responses, and delivery. By keeping your case secret, you forfeit extremely valuable feedback that will allow you to connect with your judges, and understand which arguments you need more evidence or better responses to. Even the most advanced debaters can miss some key details that could be easily fixed early in the season with a couple practice rounds – maybe a definition has some catch you hadn’t seen, your 1AC introduction is really confusing to new judges, or maybe you forgot the funding clause of your plan (yes, I’ve done that).
- The element of surprise can only take you so far
In the debate world, surprise is vastly overrated. The benefits of preparation are far greater than the benefits of surprise. Good debaters will have learned not to be flustered by cases they haven’t heard before. By relying on surprise, you’re basically betting on the skills (or lack thereof) of the negative team. In contrast, getting feedback and starting in-depth preparation early on, you’re betting on your research skills and preparation. The second option is better mainly because you can control it – you can choose to do more research and practice, but you can’t keep the negative team from being knowledgeable or resourceful. Remember: the better you do, the better negative teams you’ll debate. The best affirmative strategy is to always prepare for the best negative team that could exist.
It can feel thrilling to keep your case a surprise, but it doesn’t help you or anyone else. Good negative teams will still be well-researched and persuasive, even if they’ve never heard your case, and you’ll just be less prepared. This might seem harsh, but just remember – criticisms of your case aren’t criticisms of you. Learning to accept and welcome constructive feedback is crucial to improving your case and your debate skills, and it is an essential life skill.